People always complain about negative campaigning and say it doesn't change their vote. However, all the research I've read (each election cycle) says it works.

That said, I hope McCain finds his economic message - one that resonates with people and that he is able to hammer it home.

I think a lot of us see Obama as the final push toward socialism and while I'm concerned about an Obama presidency for so many reasons, he totally wipes away any incentive to be successful.

It is so depressing.

Reply

I will vote for Obama. I disagree with the above comments on him.
I was a young adult during the Viet Nam era, married to a man in the war over there.
I lived by Berkeley and everyday someone was tear gassing, bombing or threatening to blow something up. Sometimes it happened, sometimes it didn't. That is no excuse for Ayers but he was young and angry over the war. Justifably so.
I think this Ayers guy was of that anti-war mentality. He has since said he was sorry many times over 40 years later. Yes, he was a jerk.
But, he is serious about his efforts now and the last 30 or so years he has devoted his work with at risk children and helping to to prevent delinquency. HIs intentions are good.
Obama happened to be on a board with the man. Big deal. Ayers had a cocktail party for Obama. Big deal. Chicago is full of all walks of life. It is a very diverse city and one I grew up in.
I went to some meetings of Students for a Democratic society 40 years ago- does that make me some sort of a freak - o today? I was young and hungry for knowledge. I too hated the war.
Obama is not guilty by association.
He is a good candidate and will run this country honestly and ethically.

Reply

Obama has said that his plan is to take money from those who are earning it and give it to those who are earning less (or nothing). Obama is not even hiding the fact that his plan is nothing more than income redistribution and it is socialism.

Obama's supporters get upset, as they should, at the thought that the government may try to tell them they can't have an abortion, but they have no problem with the government controlling every other aspect of their lives, from the type of house they live in, to the car they drive, to what kind of medical care they receive, to the types of light bulbs they use. I hope that if Obama is elected, Americans finally revolt when they realize what we've gotten ourselves into.

Reply

The answer to our economic problems is not a socialist society. It encourages laziness and discourages advancement. If we let Obama become president this whole nation will get a big slap in the face when all those who have worked hard to succeed in life begin losing everything they worked for. Yes, I believe we need to help those who truly need our help, but we can do that by working to remove the roadblocks they are facing, not giving them handouts. You know the whole “Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day, but teach him to fish and he will eat for a lifetime” just makes sense, and it applies in this country as well as the third world countries. I’m not lumping Obama in as a communist or even a socialist, but we know that he definitely has socialist views, and that’s something I cannot tolerate, and I don’t know how anyone else can. History has proven that it doesn’t work – yes socialism and communism look good on paper, and they sound good coming out of a well versed, public speakers mouth, but don’t be fooled by that, please. The media will continue to spout Obama’s praises until the election day, and more than likely after the election as well. As soon as he’s elected the economy will begin turning around, not because of anything he did, but because the media will finally be putting a positive spin on the situation, hope will be reborn, and people will realize that the world is not going to end and will start spending money again. What would be better though, is if we can all figure that out now, but maybe that is too much to ask.

Reply

Rachel, you nailed it this time. Obama is not telling the truth about his philosophies that will determine how he will govern. He is saying what he "needs" to say to get elected. But look at his record. He is against capitalism, against free markets, against various rights including some explicitly protected by the US Constitution and stated as most fundamental in the Declaration of Independence. He has vowed "not" to put the US first when negotiating with other countries - and believe me, he'll be the only leader in those negotiations who is not putting his own country first. In short, he is probably the most anti-US person who has ever attempted to run for president. This is enough even if you don't believe the stuff about him being Muslim or liking terrorists.

There is a reason why the US is still the strongest country in the world. There is a big reason why folks here have the audacity to buy a house that's three times the size of the one they were born into, and to whine about a 6% unemployment rate, which most other countries can only dream of. The young people and those with poor memories and those blinded by bias are missing the point completely - and Obama is ready to capitalize on that.

Myself, I have enough money to retire, thanks to my hard work and careful spending. I have no intention to continue working if Obama plans to take the fruits of my labor and give them to less-motivated people. Let the bleeding-hearts pick up the tab if they think that's such a wonderful plan.

As for negative campaigning, it's kinda dumb to argue about it. There has never been a campaign that didn't do it, and I'm pretty sure there never will be.

Reply

The Democrat Party is the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

It's a good thing they are absolutely brilliant at spinning history to convince people that they were not the party that fought to continue slavery, tried to pass discriminatory laws, and continue today to fight to keep impoverished and Black people from succeeding. Now that they have lost the civil rights battle (thanks to people like Dr,. Martin Luther King, Jr. (who was not a Democrat) and Dwight Eisenhower, the only way for them to continue their policies of controlling the masses is to focus on socialism. And the good little sheep are following.

Reply

Can someone please explain "radical community organizing" is? And why is it so bad?

I think those who point to this as some underground plot to overthrow the government have no idea what the needs of most Americans are. Our inner cities are so wrought with poverty and crime that anything BUT radical community organizing will fail miserably.

I find it commendable that Senator Obama actually chose to spend his early career trying to make urban communities better. I think this speaks volumes for the kind of man he is. Rather than be some suburnanite who writes a check to the United Way every year and feels good about himself, he chose to help in a meaningful, personal way.

Reply

It hasn't changed my vote at all. Neither one of them are getting my vote. Interesting how the President's #1 responsibility is supposed to be to defend and uphold the constitution. I haven't heard either one of them talk or refer to the constitution once. I was a Ron Paul supporter, but he's out now. My vote is going to Chuck Baldwin.

Reply

Community organizing among the urban poor has long been an honorable American tradition. For example, Jane Addams’s famous Hull House dramatically uplifted the late-nineteenth-century Chicago slums. But "radical community organizers" (as Matthew refers to and as Obama is associated with) such as ACORN is completely different philosophically. Hull House and its many successors emphasized self-empowerment: the poor, they thought, could take control of their lives and communities through education, hard work, and personal responsibility. ACORN instead promotes a 1960s-bred agenda of anti-capitalism, central planning, victimology, and government handouts to the poor. As a result, not only does it harm the poor it claims to serve; it is also a serious threat to the urban future.

So you are correct, Matthew. Obama's association with ACORN does speak volumes about the kind of man he is.

Reply

“minor professional affiliation” with William Ayers.

Well, I’d be willing to dismiss that “minor affiliation” if it weren’t for all of the other radicals that Obama is “minorly affiliated” with – Rev. Wright, in whose church Obama sat for 20 years, and to this day, has not denounced; with Frank Marshall Davis, a self-admitted communist, who Obama said influenced him from childhood; with ACORN, who Obama is currently denouncing, but who he worked with early in his career. From a speech earlier this year, about community organizations like ACORN “…during the transition, we’re going to be calling all of you in…so that you have input in the next presidency of the United States of America”.

“And then McCain acts surprised when audiences yell out ‘Treason,’ and ‘Kill him!’"

A few people yell at a rally, and it’s all over the press. But go ahead and open a new window and Google “Sarah Palin is a” and insert the C-word there. The results are shocking. Further, more hatred has been spewed by the left over the choice of Palin as a running mate. Madonna is caught on video announcing to a packed stadium, “I will kick her ass”, and Sandra Bernhardt, classy as always, says (also on video) that Palin had better not show up in New York, lest she be “gang-raped by her (berhnard’s) big black brothers”. And yet, we are told that it’s the Conservatives who are violent, radical, and hateful? Where is Obama’s denunciation of such activities? I hear crickets chirping.

“McCain's doing everything to distract us from the fact that he and his running mate are unprepared to deal with the economy. Instead, even as Obama yesterday presented a cogent, thorough economic rescue plan,”

While I don’t agree with the things that McCain has said, I don’t think you can call Obama’s “plan” cogent and thorough, when he states the following (in a speech this weekend, when confronted by a plumber asking if Obama would raise taxes): “…I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.” That’s socialism, folks.

McCain isn’t so much “going dirty” as he is speaking the truth.

Reply

Wow, if the plumber in Rachel's column makes over $250K then I'm in the wrong business. Obama has repeatedly said he'd only raise taxes on the 5% of the country who makes over $250K annually. On another note, the bigger concern is what I see as McCain's constantly changing message and impulse decision making. This guy is all over the place, causing this Independent voter to fear that he really is too old and veering toward dimentia....that means dear readers that we could be stuck with a Governor who was proven by a non-partisan board to have ABUSED her power in the state of Alaska. The thought of Sarah Palin anywhere near power is as frightening as what George Bush has done to this great country.

Reply

To me, this race is all about intelligence (Obama and Biden) over ego (McCain and Palin) The Kennedy and Clinton obviously see value in Obama, as do thousands of smart and well informed people who have their pulse on what's good for the common people....jobs, health insurance, stable economy, etc. But just like Sarah Palin does, Rachel is projecting all sorts of biased and uninformed slurs and opinions. Makes me wonder if she, like the ticket she supports, really understands what the greater good is all about. Wasn't it John McCain who couldn't remember how many houses he has? And who wants to tax us for health insurance? I'll take intelligence over ego any time.

Reply

it's entirely possible that the plumber makes over $250K a year, if he owns the business and has a couple employees. $250K a year isn't all that much for a small business. And yes, Obama wants to tax him.

And "cut taxes for 95% of the population"... 40% OF WHOM DO NOT PAY TAXES. How is that going to work, exactly? Will they get a paycheck?

Yep. There's some real intelligence.

Reply

EK said that McCain wants to tax us for health insurance, then tries to claim that he and the other Obama followers are intelligent. Too bad EK is having trouble comprehending this one and now he's announced it to everyone on this blog.

McCain’s plan is to alter the tax breaks the federal government grants those who purchase health insurance. Currently, every dollar your employer spends on health benefits avoids federal payroll and income taxes. If you don’t have job-based coverage, you generally get nothing.

McCain proposes to eliminate that inequitable tax break and replace it with a universal tax credit. Every individual would get a flat $2,500 tax break, while families would get $5,000, no matter where you purchase health insurance.

Since part of the idea is to eliminate the existing tax break, Biden tried to claim that the McCain plan would cause a tax increase. However, Biden later acknowledged the existence of a tax cut in McCain’s plan.

The left-leaning Tax Policy Center estimates the average taxpayer would see their tax bill go down by $1,241 in 2009, though the average tax cut would get smaller over time.

Reply